Author Topic: Acceptable risk and soloing  (Read 9021 times)

steve weitzler

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 526
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2013, 02:44:39 PM »
I also think perhaps that the reason I don't do some of the things I used to do is because I am physically and mentally weaker than 20-30 years ago. I did certain things years ago because I thought I could get away with it. I don't do those things today cause I know I can't.

ridgerunner

• NEClimbs Junior Member
• Posts: 59
• Carpe diem !
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2013, 03:38:51 PM »
"Very well put Jamie. I couldn't agree with you more. "

Yes. +1

strandman

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 5829
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2013, 07:21:46 PM »
EDIT- i believe that Tut's was on Gasherbrum 4 not Annapurna 4

lucky luke

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 1762
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #33 on: March 26, 2013, 04:13:14 AM »
And for the one of you who doubts the definition of risk, I will let MIT explain the concept:
In the equation they said: "If both the probability and severity can be quantified, the risk is simply the product: risk = probability * severity".

What was the probability that Jamie was in an avalanche in his story. We can not quantify it?  What was the severity of being in the avalanche, some people survive at an avalanche. So, both the probability and the severity CAN NOT be quantify in climbing. Your equation is for management, not for climbing. So, you think that because you said that marijuana is dangerous for your health and you smoke a lot younger that your child won't take drugs? (note I am allergic to any combustion of leaves or green bark, I take a chance to dye if I smoke). The dream to be in the mountain after reading the story of jamie will be greater, but your child will have less knowledge because you bring them in a situation where you had fun, but it is not for your child.

The definition of risk is: A situation involving exposure to danger. One can climb everest and will not be in danger for all his trip. It is what tradmand said. He was soloing standard and was safer than some new rope up climber. In your text, I prefer the probabilistic risk assesment (PRA) as a tool to evaluate the risk:
1. Identify hazards and initiating events
2. Identify mitigating safety measures
3. Trace possible chains of events
4. Quantify all individual probabilities and severities
5. Aggregate probabilities and severities, and calculate risks

For avalanches, identify hazards could be to identify the avalanche bed and identify the initiating events could be trigger by human, if it is it will depend on the direction that the human take, or natural avalanche, 2- identify mitigating safety measures: don't be under it or cross it very fast or at certain time and hours or...
You can use the PRA to analyse an accident. Many times, you will understand that the person never do a probabilistic risk assesment, but just do the "state of the art method" without thinking.

kenreville

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 727
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #34 on: March 26, 2013, 07:23:54 AM »
And for the one of you who doubts the definition of risk, I will let MIT explain the concept:
In the equation they said: "If both the probability and severity can be quantified, the risk is simply the product: risk = probability * severity".

What was the probability that Jamie was in an avalanche in his story. We can not quantify it?  What was the severity of being in the avalanche, some people survive at an avalanche. So, both the probability and the severity CAN NOT be quantify in climbing. Your equation is for management, not for climbing. So, you think that because you said that marijuana is dangerous for your health and you smoke a lot younger that your child won't take drugs? (note I am allergic to any combustion of leaves or green bark, I take a chance to dye if I smoke). The dream to be in the mountain after reading the story of jamie will be greater, but your child will have less knowledge because you bring them in a situation where you had fun, but it is not for your child.

The definition of risk is: A situation involving exposure to danger. One can climb everest and will not be in danger for all his trip. It is what tradmand said. He was soloing standard and was safer than some new rope up climber. In your text, I prefer the probabilistic risk assesment (PRA) as a tool to evaluate the risk:
1. Identify hazards and initiating events
2. Identify mitigating safety measures
3. Trace possible chains of events
4. Quantify all individual probabilities and severities
5. Aggregate probabilities and severities, and calculate risks

For avalanches, identify hazards could be to identify the avalanche bed and identify the initiating events could be trigger by human, if it is it will depend on the direction that the human take, or natural avalanche, 2- identify mitigating safety measures: don't be under it or cross it very fast or at certain time and hours or...
You can use the PRA to analyse an accident. Many times, you will understand that the person never do a probabilistic risk assesment, but just do the "state of the art method" without thinking.

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
As the rumble of nearby avalanches increases, there is NO time to analyze jackshit. You're in a whiteout, there's Himalayan size avalanches all around you- the conclusion to beat it out of there was a no-brainer. One minute you're dragging a sled full of the last of your gear (much of it abandonded at higher camps), the next micromillisecond later, you're tumbling around in the madness.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2013, 09:41:49 AM by kenreville »

strandman

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 5829
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #35 on: March 26, 2013, 09:39:31 AM »
Right ken.. even Twight  says " run away as fast as you can"

lucky luke

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 1762
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #36 on: March 26, 2013, 11:23:41 AM »

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
glad that you came back safe. But it is a proove of what I was saying: the probability and severity can't be quantified.

I wrote a very good reply. But I washed it out by mistake. And I don't have time/courage to take an hour to rewrite it.
Chriss Bonington, 78 in 2012, exposure...danger...tactician and safe leader. and many other at the bottom of the cliff (cote, hurley and other that I don't remember the name who look the cliff with sadness as there relative asked then to stay on the ground.

alluring and compelling...it is not what I like in climbing. I am more from the star treck generation:" Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no man has gone before." One day I saw the brown eye of a peregrine falcon flewing just at ten feet of me. the yosemite valley from el capitan, the diedral in la pomme d'or, the strength of nature in white out at huntington gully...it is not danger, as I trained for that, that bring me there but pure beauty.

kenreville

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 727
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #37 on: March 26, 2013, 11:35:57 AM »

It wasn't Jamie that got swept off in an avalanche Luke.
It was me.
He dug me out. (thanx JC)
glad that you came back safe. But it is a proove of what I was saying: the probability and severity can't be quantified.

I wrote a very good reply. But I washed it out by mistake. And I don't have time/courage to take an hour to rewrite it.
Chriss Bonington, 78 in 2012, exposure...danger...tactician and safe leader. and many other at the bottom of the cliff (cote, hurley and other that I don't remember the name who look the cliff with sadness as there relative asked then to stay on the ground.

alluring and compelling...it is not what I like in climbing. I am more from the star treck generation:" Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no man has gone before." One day I saw the brown eye of a peregrine falcon flewing just at ten feet of me. the yosemite valley from el capitan, the diedral in la pomme d'or, the strength of nature in white out at huntington gully...it is not danger, as I trained for that, that bring me there but pure beauty.

When I asked John Bouchard years ago how he had mustered up the courage to solo Western Lady, he smiled his shark grin and said " I wanted to go where no man had gone before". John was a trekkie too. Who knew?

lucky luke

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 1762
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #38 on: March 26, 2013, 12:18:30 PM »
John was a trekkie too. Who knew?
Certainly a CLIMBER.

snowleopard

• NEClimbs Junior Member
• Posts: 56
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #39 on: March 26, 2013, 01:43:48 PM »
One evening at the Cranmore climbing wall probably early to mid 90's I was getting my harness on and Bouchard was
standing alone nearby.  Several people were on the wall and suddenly Bouchard starts laughing to himself (practically an
inaudible giggle).  Wanting to be in on the joke someone asks "What's so funny John?"  His reply "I'm watching the humans"
followed by another chuckle.

old_school

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 2504
• "Climb Now, Work Later."
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #40 on: March 26, 2013, 02:17:04 PM »
John did look a little bit like Spock!
"Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you will be a mile away from them and you will have their shoes."

smartpig

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 469
• There is only one kind of magic and this is ‘doing
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #41 on: March 26, 2013, 02:25:48 PM »
From November and December 1987:
« Last Edit: March 26, 2013, 02:31:22 PM by smartpig »
Jamie Cunningham
Franconia, NH

Jamie Cunningham Photography: http://www.jamiecunninghamphoto.com

The Notches guidebook Facebook page ("like" it!):

smartpig

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 469
• There is only one kind of magic and this is ‘doing
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #42 on: March 26, 2013, 03:32:11 PM »
1987: Annapurna 1 and Nepal images continued:
« Last Edit: March 26, 2013, 03:34:48 PM by smartpig »
Jamie Cunningham
Franconia, NH

Jamie Cunningham Photography: http://www.jamiecunninghamphoto.com

The Notches guidebook Facebook page ("like" it!):

smartpig

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 469
• There is only one kind of magic and this is ‘doing
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #43 on: March 26, 2013, 03:41:32 PM »
1987: Annapurna 1 and Nepal images continued:
Jamie Cunningham
Franconia, NH

Jamie Cunningham Photography: http://www.jamiecunninghamphoto.com

The Notches guidebook Facebook page ("like" it!):

strandman

• NEClimbs God
• Posts: 5829
Re: Acceptable risk and soloing
« Reply #44 on: March 26, 2013, 06:08:28 PM »
Fuckin 'Aye lad... NE climber rule.. it's just nobody else knows it..

i'll put them up to anybody....JB, Kurt, Jimmie, jimmy, Ed, bayard, YOU.. etc, etc

Hard ass mfo's   Tommy nonis, tom Callaghan, Base  the list goes on and on

You learn to play in NE and you can play anywhere